[USF] [Any] Limit the LMG1919 to only one per squad.

#1
4 years ago

Every game it turns Riflemen from the best starting infantry to T-800's walking around at the beginning of Terminator 2. Fearless, emotionless, killing machines. At 3CP. So by the time you're finally getting your first tech down to help slow down the Doom Blob guess what? Your Volksgrenadiers/Sturms can't compete unless your opponent is a total moron. Maybe if they're high vet and green cover. STGs are kind of overrated and irrelevant at that range.

MG34? Smoke, ez. Flaktruck? LOL. Luchs, ohai Stuart. It wasn't as prominent because it was confined to the Priest commander but now that Mr. Calliope is out, your infantry extermination skills equal or surpass that of Veteran Obersoldaten. Now it is on a virtually flawless, infantry exterminating commander. At 3 CP. Not only that you have no early vehicles to fear that early on that present such a threat as opposed to say a Stuart, T-70, AEC etc. Not that it matters anyway because your stuff is better BUT the fact still remains of being extremely effective AND efficient. Versatile shouldn't mean exceptional at everything.

When 7 Pop Riflemen fearlessly walk up to Vetted Obersoldaten I have to protest this. You don't even have to wait a minute to equip them nor research them. It's just HAHAHAHA WHO NEEDS COVER?!?! It's not like USF has to spend a ton of munitions to make their infantry viable in combat. It's just at that range, on a basic infantry unit that has that many abilities already, so early, no just no. Single? Fair enough. Double? Would you allow Obers to equip two MG34s?

(And "BUT THEY'RE 70 MUNS A PIECE!" Worth every bit of it. It's not like they ever drop them like say a PTRS Rifle.)

«1

Comments

  • #2
    4 years ago
    le12role12ro Posts: 2,333 mod
    edited September 2016

    Although I do believe that LMG1919 are rather dangerous in their current state and need a change, I still advocate the lack of strong abilities of other USF commanders. I personally would rather see balanced versions of E8/Riflemen Flameblob/Pershings/Grayhound of doom/P47 recon+tank strafe/REblobs again/Double Bar Pathfinders, than a too much of a nerf to LMG1919.

    I'm sure positively changing other commanders whilst nerfing the 1919 would motivate people to step away from the standard 1919 to callip we see in every game and open up with new tactics and strategies.

  • #3
    4 years ago
    HingieHingie Posts: 2,006
    Buffing a thing to OPness in order to disencourage people from using another very powerful or broken thing is quite nonsense if you ask me. It might make people switch to other commanders bit those will be just as problematic as the thing you just made less popular, but not less powerful.
  • #4
    4 years ago
    LazarusLazarus Posts: 4,096

    Indeed, by definition if you buff another USF commander to the point where people break from the Calliope/Ranger/1919 meta - that commander by the very fact people switched would need to be more viable. Which is no bueno.

    Your average player wants to take the path of least resistance to victory. That's the simple fact of the matter. Ideally - and not just for USF, but for all factions, we need to place some kind of severe punishment for doubling down on massed infantry or spammed units. Again, a universal demo is the first step in the right direction (give it to everyone else stock for 120 muni so the Soviets still get an edge, of course). It'll at least mean that people have to invest in a sweeper amongst their blob.

  • #5
    4 years ago
    le12role12ro Posts: 2,333 mod
    edited September 2016

    To clarify: I agree that 1919 are dangerous and need a change. I agree that other USF commanders had their balance problems too. Hence me clearly saying balanced versions of items that were without doubt OP in the past. I didn't mean to open the can of making them more viable but merely viable again. I really miss seeing different USF builds to fight against or with, I doubt I've seen a single Assault Engineer or Pathfinder, or other weird USF tactics that worked in the past since the introduction of Callip commander, and the changes to the other commanders. I occasionally see M10s. There should be a way to reduce the overuse of 1919s-callips, whilst motivating people to get back to other commanders.

    The recent non-meta tournament demonstrate nicely that there is still play for non 1919 commanders. :)

  • #7
    4 years ago
    le12role12ro Posts: 2,333 mod
    edited September 2016

    That something feels balanced to someone doesn't mean that the person is blowing their opinion out of proportions. :neutral:

  • #8
    4 years ago
    StormlessUKStormless… United KingdomPosts: 38

    @le12ro said:
    I didn't mean to open the can of making them more viable but merely viable again. I really miss seeing different USF builds to fight against or with, I doubt I've seen a single Assault Engineer or Pathfinder, or other weird USF tactics that worked in the past since the introduction of Callip commander, and the changes to the other commanders.

    I've always thought the best thing for this game would be to balance 5 factions with no commanders and then slowly balance each commander as an 'addition' to the faction rather than trying to balance them all at once. Each faction should be able to play evenly against a faction without picking a commander even if the opponent has one. The advantage shouldn't be SO huge. It should work in a way that it changes game play style and maybe choice of units rather than being a necessity in order to survive competitively. Instead the commanders fill in gaps where faction design has left holes.

    What the Calliope commander did, was fill a huge gap in the USF faction of 'no decent indirect fire'. It was a unit I always wanted to see, but unfortunately it was just used to cover up a flawed design.

    The other issue that comes to mind is the call-in situation. You don't need to tech to major in order to release the Calliope. By not forcing tech, the Calliope can come out on the field as the first big unit. It's not unbeatable. I don't even feel the Calliope is OP, but it's just a commander you have to pick to complete the faction.

    British - Mortar/Base Arty
    Soviets - Katushya
    OKW - Stuka
    Ostheer - Panzerwerfer
    USF - (You must purchase a commander to play like the other factions)

    I just think the design of factions vs commander choice is unfortunately weak. As there is 0% chance of the changes needed to make commanders with factions work as intended. I think the best option is to continue looking at the damage stats and cost of things to try an implement the balance in this way. I really don't see any other USF commanders with the versatility of the Tactical Support.

  • #9
    4 years ago
    _Aqua__Aqua_ Posts: 1,951

    Replace Tac Support 1919s with AssEngies. It would likely still be meta, but it wouldn't utterly destroy Infantry Co.

  • #10
    4 years ago
    GrittleGrittle Posts: 993

    Aqua said:
    Replace Tac Support 1919s with AssEngies. It would likely still be meta, but it wouldn't utterly destroy Infantry Co.

    then RIP in even more piece to mech company, who already has the Halftrack AssEng combo, but even worse.

  • #11
    4 years ago
    Mech needs love for sure, but its already dead.. So no need handicapping the living for the glory of the dead... Imo what should have happened was: calliope was a muni upgrade for a regular built Sherman, main gun remains, decrew remains BUT costs somethin like 140mu. Thats 2 less m1919s if you want rocket support. Thats 1 less calliope if you want to kit kit out a rifle squad. But alas, im just some dweeb on the Internet...
  • #12
    4 years ago
    _Aqua__Aqua_ Posts: 1,951

    @Grittle said:

    then RIP in even more piece to mech company, who already has the Halftrack AssEng combo, but even worse.

    Crap, good point. Maybe pathfinders or some unused weapon, just something to fill the gap. I'm with Dark though, if it came down to choosing between Mech or Infantry, Infantry would be much easier to salvage then Mech.

  • #13
    4 years ago

    There are virtually no "go-to" commanders as OKW that do not have glaring weaknesses. Fallschirms CAN be powerful but they lack off-maps, Command Panther CAN be powerful, but no hard hitting off-maps (by the way that 3 CP STGs for Obers is really useful at that point in the game), the only good OKW off-map commanders are really underwhelming beyond that little point of said off-map.

    That being said, there is just flat out no reason to not choose Calliope/Pershing commanders. You really have everything you need to win already and the commander is just for flavor but sometimes not having strong enough indirect fire or off-maps can be doom for Ost/OKW say the 105mm for example. So really it comes back to the point of either having Rangers with Orbital Strike Insta-Smoke with heavy tank call-in with insta-buffs, or the Calliope commander which is flawless in itself of turning Riflemen into the above argument. The way that it augments basic troops in both cases is just absolutely overwhelming at times, regardless of how you play and largely depends on luck for victory.

  • #14
    4 years ago
    GrittleGrittle Posts: 993

    Aqua said:

    @Grittle said:

    then RIP in even more piece to mech company, who already has the Halftrack AssEng combo, but even worse.

    Crap, good point. Maybe pathfinders or some unused weapon, just something to fill the gap. I'm with Dark though, if it came down to choosing between Mech or Infantry, Infantry would be much easier to salvage then Mech.

    I wouldn't say Mech is beyond salvaging, It just needs more power.

    but m1919 lmgs (and Bren) need to be limited to 1 per squad, no if ands or quacks about it.

    now, another thing that could happen is to classify the Calliope as "heavy", I.E

    Limit to 1, maybe 2 if needed

    must be manually loaded after each barrage like ST and AVRE

    to compensate, it fires the historically accurate 64 rockets.

    If push comes to shove and it somehow becomes useless because of these changes, make it use its main cannon (albiet not as potent), so it becomes a sherman with a turretless stuart gun and 64 rockets.

    I mean, as a mobile artillery piece, its's the heaviest tank with the most powerful barrages. so why not just label it as a heavy tank.

    Now for Mech, I have made multiple changes over it's lifetime, and this is my favorite change for it right now:

    WC51 w/ .50 cal.

    • Renamed to WC51 w/ .30 Cal.
    • Add 20 Munitions upgrade for a .50 Cal MG, renaming it back to original name and increased attack power and penetration
    • Increase Health from 180 to 200
    • WC51 Crew bail out during combat reduced from 3 seconds to 1 seconds
    • WC51 Crew comes with a free BAR and slightly more durability than a normal vehicle crew (Could be renamed to Assault Crew)

    The point of these changes is to make the WC51 more viable longer into the game and worth the price of 240 manpower, 20 fuel, from the 2 minute interval it has now to about 10 minutes. The more powerful crew it comes with makes it able to take on lone AT guns and AT infantry easier with the quick bailout micro and dat BAR.

    M3 Halftrack and friends:

    • AssEngs come prepacked with flamers
    • Halftrack itself gets more durability on all fronts (armor, hp, MG gunner dmg)
    • Halftrack now gets radio net vet 1
    • 100 less manpower, 5 less fuel

    It is currently overpriced (520 manpower and 35 fuel!) and too paper thin, these changes makes it cheaper (420 manpower, 30 fuel), gives the engie some free flamers, and allows the M3 to able to take and dish more damage, thus giving it vet and able to abuse the radio net passive with other shermans.

    that should be enough to make mech "viable" as a early game booster with easy smooth transitions to mid game

  • #15
    4 years ago
    BaálthazorBaálthazor The shoreline by the river Styx.Posts: 1,092
    edited September 2016
    @Grittle
    Not even with manual reload and the heavy limit put on it, would I agree to the Calliope having 64 rockets. It would still be insanely powerful!

    Just imagine your opponent forcing a full retreat on your units and then firing such a barrage..! :o
    With rocket-arty atm, at least you still need some kind of timing, but with 64 rockets you can pretty much just point and click and for the next minute or so, your base(or other area) becomes off limits.
    Then just reload and rinse and repeat.
    As if axis squads aren't being wiped enough already...

    Not in a million years would I sanction such a change tbh!
  • #16
    4 years ago
    • As a rule, I'd say most Axis players complain too much and are in a very poor position to do so.
      ... ... ... But I'll agree for once. 2x M1919 squads is... hm, ew. One M1919 per squad max, please :) (This from a allied fan)
      But I want standard upgrade for +DP28 for soviets ^_^
  • #18
    3 years ago
    GrittleGrittle Posts: 993

    @Baálthazor said:
    @Grittle
    Not even with manual reload and the heavy limit put on it, would I agree to the Calliope having 64 rockets. It would still be insanely powerful!

    Just imagine your opponent forcing a full retreat on your units and then firing such a barrage..! :o
    With rocket-arty atm, at least you still need some kind of timing, but with 64 rockets you can pretty much just point and click and for the next minute or so, your base(or other area) becomes off limits.
    Then just reload and rinse and repeat.
    As if axis squads aren't being wiped enough already...

    Not in a million years would I sanction such a change tbh!

    Well, it could have reduced range, making it a "short range" rocket artillery piece. and increased scatter.

    I'm just throwing ideas around, the Calliope needs to be toned down. Not because its OP, but because it's too useful compared to the other commanders.

    Priest could use a small buff, Mech Company could use the changes I put up in my previous post above, and recon greyhound needs a buff and the air combat drop needs a serious price reduction and CP down by 1. Maybe I should make a thread to highlight these changes.. AGAIN

  • #20
    3 years ago
    comrade_daelincomrade_d… Posts: 2,948

    Weapon racks are meant to be given out to anyone who can afford it. Can't it just be increased in cost to like 90 munitions?

  • #21
    3 years ago
    LazarusLazarus Posts: 4,096

    Given that there is no fuel/mp cost to unlock them... I mean we should start at 80 and see what happens from there

  • #22
    3 years ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,824

    I think that is a big thing, the lack of tech cost. They be better than bars but also dont delay that Stuart at all.. 80mu is certainly a start point id be interested in trying.

  • #23
    3 years ago

    Why not just make the 1919 come from weapon racks and maybe nerf performance slightly?

  • #24
    3 years ago

    There is no stopping the Freedom Blob once it reaches critical mass...unless you have a lucky PWerfer strike handy. But usually the problems snowball wayyyyyyyyy before that ever reaches the field.

  • #25
    3 years ago
    GrittleGrittle Posts: 993

    @captainjordy said:
    Why not just make the 1919 come from weapon racks and maybe nerf performance slightly?

    it already come from weapon racks...

  • #26
    3 years ago

    @Grittle said:

    @captainjordy said:
    Why not just make the 1919 come from weapon racks and maybe nerf performance slightly?

    it already come from weapon racks...

    I meant change it so it requires weapon racks purchased

  • #27
    3 years ago

    Freedom Blobs piss me off in general because once your opponents hits 3CP your infantry are all but useless in fire fights.

  • #28
    3 years ago

    Can someone explain me why are 1919s considered a problem, when BARs are almost completely superior to them and used by the majority of high ranking players?

  • #29
    3 years ago
    LazarusLazarus Posts: 4,096

    Because you have to pay fuel and MP to unlock BARs - and not everyone is fine with double BARs anyway (though that problem could solve itself once terminator vet is fixed)

Sign In or Register to comment.

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

  • © SEGA. SEGA, the SEGA logo, Relic Entertainment, the Relic Entertainment logo, Company of Heroes and the Company of Heroes logo are either trademarks or registered trademarks of SEGA Holdings Co., Ltd. or its affiliates. All rights reserved. SEGA is registered in the US Patent and Trademark Office. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners.

DeutschEnglishEspañolFrançaisItalianoРусский